宣言2015

When there is a shortage of genuine urgency -- political or aesthetic or otherwise, an established artist makes art by finding an established actress to read out loud established art historical texts, and calls it manifesto.

It doesn't seem to be self conscious of the irony of its commercial gloss, bourgeois opulence, stylish artifice. Is there a manifesto that does not manifests anything new, raw, or real? Is there such a thing as a makeup manifesto?

Maybe there is, in the kind of art world establishment we have. Maybe there isn't, there are only make-up artists -- there is apparently an army of them here, who are the true artists of this artwork.

I used to think it is bad enough for us today to have only dead manifestos. When Julian Rosefeldt bring them back to life, I see zombies. Now I regret.

The ticket money I spent on this How Art Museum exhibition: what a regret also. How Art Museum, like many of those newly established contemporary art institutions in the past few years in this country, thinks that having a "creative" name makes it look more creative. It does, but this "creativity" has as little to do with contemporary art creation as Julian Rosefeldt's "Manifesto" has anything to do with manifesto.

This is the first exhibition (a manifesto exhibition) of How Art Museum, along with a design exhibition elegantly titled "The New Creative Future of Chinese Design," and a shop almost the size of a whole exhibition floor filled with arty merchandise, appropriately named "art derivatives", by Jeff Koons, Murakami Takashi, Xu Zhen, Xiang Jing & Qu Guangci, and their wannabes. Outside the shop is the namesake hotel filled with sculptures and paintings by even worse artists. The museum requires all visitors to exit the museum into hotel's third floor (then to its tasteless lobby), instead of the museum entrance, so that we have to endure this exhibition outside the exhibition.

Unlike Julian Rosefeldt, who does have his own merits in art, which I do not bother to mention here, this bright new How museum seems to be desperately assembling and manifesting everything that is wrong with the art world, and from its beginning we've learned that all it wants to do in the future is to assemble and manifest more. The only problem left for them is how.

Menifesto：all the solid melts in the air，to put out a menifesto，you must want A，B，C，to formated against 1，2，3.To fly or rage，to shapen ur wings to conquer and seminate little abc or big ABC. To sign，shout，swear，to prove ur no plus outro，to organize pros to form an absolute and irrefutable evidence. I am against action. I am for continuous contradiction and affirmation too . I am neither for nor against. I do not explain，because I hate common sense. I am writing a menifesto，because I have nothing to say. I speak only of myself and since I do not wish to convince.I have no right to drag others into my river. I am olidged no one to follow me. And everyone practice his art in his own way.if he knows the joys to rise like an arrow to extra layers or other joys to goes down to mine of corpos flowers，fertil basels. and Does anyone think they find psychic base common for all man kind. How can anyone expect to put order into chaos to constitute that infinite shape of variation？MAN

* 本文首发于 ELLEMAN 睿士，亦发表于深焦 DeepFocus。

本届圣丹斯首映单元里最具实验性的电影得数由德国艺术家朱利安·罗斯菲尔德执导、凯特布兰切特一人分饰十三角的《宣言》。

朱利安此前的作品多为在博物馆展出的装置艺术与短片，在圣丹斯放映前，《宣言》刚在纽约军械库公园大道上以装置作品的形式展出，13 面巨大的荧幕上跃动着截然不同的形象，从无家可归的流浪汉到酒吧里的朋克女郎到压抑的家庭主妇，不同的口音、不同的妆容、不同的衣着，都在凯特绝妙的表演中显得立体迷人，最后呈现的马赛克拼贴形式大杂烩则制造出强烈的视觉和音觉效果，产生巨大震撼力、冲击力和艺术感染力，使得观众沉浸其中。

在圣丹斯，《宣言》以传统电影长片的形式出现，影片摘取了二十世纪艺术家、活动家、导演提出的艺术宣言，涵盖波普艺术、激浪艺术、达达主义、未来主义、道格玛95等，试图探索艺术的本质及其元精神。以独白或画外音形式出现，宣言表达了对精神根基的渴望，既然原创是虚假的命题，只有发自肺腑的宣言能使这一切凸显真实，这只是一项运动的开端，宣言发出之后，形形色色的个体前仆后继，为此献出自己的青春与热血。

影片兼具现代艺术的大胆气息，开头便是燃烧的烟火，在黑色幕布的映衬下显得格外热烈，瞬间将观众引入矛盾的境地，一个否定理性又渴望理性的状态。在电影的层面上，《宣言》谈不上吸引人眼球，导演坦言，若不是凯特的出演，这部片子的影响力一定会大打折扣。

大量的语言堆砌和简单的片段叙事，很容易使观众分心，抽离的体验令人疲倦，激情澎湃的演讲亦导致听觉麻痹。然而，影片的开拓性就足够伟大，全部取景于柏林，仅用了十二天的时间拍摄，在一个历史渊源复杂的大城市里寻找与多个思潮内核相符的场景，加以匹配角色与文本，项目本身就是一次艺术冒险，诠释着现代艺术的宣言。

通过角色对比制造的强烈冲突再次淡化了其电影性，《宣言》渴望引发对艺术本身的思考和讨论，渴望以全局的眼光包容万象，使得观众不禁发问：艺术是什么？然而，对提问者最尊重的答案是缄默不语，正如导演说的，凯特不是发言人，而是宣言这一本体的化身，她没有代表什么，没有呼吁什么，因为那就是她。有趣的是，影片选择了由一位女性来担任男性写出的宣言的化身。

这不是一部严格意义上的电影，因为这电影没有剧情。它更接近展览上的一个影像作品，12个不相关的分格里，13个角色用不同的艺术主义的宣言演绎了12段影片。这部片子爱的人应该会爱的，不爱的大概看的要睡觉了。

从艺术的角度看，这是一个非常有趣的影响实验作品。首先它的视效非常吸引人，可以说各种场景的设定和装置感都很厉害。因为没有剧情，于是很显然视觉就是片子非常主要的一个部分。我最爱代表建筑的工人和化工员的建构主义，当然本来我自己也很喜欢这个艺术风格。整体的安排，镜头，就是艺术作品就对了。

除了艺术就是表演。凯特布兰切特不愧是大魔王本王，13个角色，就是13个人，不跳戏，不突兀，配合服化简直牛逼！如果你仔细听，每个角色的语调，口音，节奏都会略有不同，就是一个炸裂。结尾12个人一起说话的镜头头皮发麻，很难不佩服这个演员，也很难想象还有没有人能这样展现这些角色，毕竟没有剧情，台词全是晦涩的宣言！

这部片子在我的片单里有一段时间了，加入的时候是准备当教科书看的，也确实有效果。现当代艺术进入了一个“定义艺术”的时代，任何一种新想法都可以称为一个新流派，只要你有名字有作品。万物皆是艺术，人人都是艺术家。于是信息爆炸，流派满天飞。不断的提出的疑问就是，什么是艺术？而这个问题是没有答案的。

就像是开篇导演就说的“一个人怎么能将无尽无形的混沌秩序化，就凭人？”那么人又凭什么去定义统一艺术观点或者审美呢？而这些来自不断冲击艺术边界，刷新艺术定义，提出新的艺术风格的人们，就正好在试图秩序化的时候丰富了艺术本身的无序，多有趣又多有哲理呢。

“现代艺术都是假的”我想这就是导演最大的中心思想，给你看看，到底什么是现代艺术。他的高明之处就在于从文本出发，为文本和视觉安排了一个落脚点，我们不讨论艺术家，不讨论流派作品，我们就讨论这宣言从谁的嘴里在哪里说出来最具讽刺。我强烈建议大家进行搜索后再观看一次，有趣的很！

如果艺术没有边界，电影也没有，所以这部片子也是电影，也是艺术。

“不仅要改变艺术界，它旨在改变全世界。我们在世界中寻找自我，向世界呼喊出自己内心的不安，我们要重现狂飙突进的时代。”导演朱利安说。 —— 引言

我并不是很懂艺术，但我熟悉我所理解的个人世界，充斥的虚伪，矛盾和永无止尽的贪婪。这是这个时代，这也是每一个时代。

身处于这样的或者那样的体制下，我们永远都是戴着枷锁前行，我们幻想着有朝一日可以自由的舞蹈，却不得不在第二天早上按时起床去推石头上山。

我们，用我们来欺骗自己，用他们去给他们做榜样。

铸建了一个庞大无比的监狱。

而宣言，

大概也算是一种反抗方式了吧。